On Tue 22-03-16 13:23:45, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:00:18PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > extern signed long schedule_timeout_interruptible(signed long timeout);
> > extern signed long schedule_timeout_killable(signed long timeout);
> > extern signed long schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(signed long timeout);
> > +extern signed long schedule_timeout_idle(signed long timeout);
>
> > +/*
> > + * Like schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(), except this task will not contribute
> > + * to load average.
> > + */
> > +signed long __sched schedule_timeout_idle(signed long timeout)
> > +{
> > + __set_current_state(TASK_IDLE);
> > + return schedule_timeout(timeout);
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(schedule_timeout_idle);
>
> Yes we have 3 such other wrappers, but I've gotta ask: why? They seem
> pretty pointless.
It seems it is just too easy to miss the __set_current_state (I am
talking from my own experience). This also seems to be a pretty common
pattern so why not wrap it under a common call.
> Why not kill the lot?
We have over 400 users, would it be much better if we open code all of
them? It doesn't sound like a huge win to me.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>